Published by
Stanford Medicine

Category

Global Health

Ebola, Global Health, Infectious Disease, Patient Care, Stanford News, Surgery

How to keep safe while operating on Ebola patients

How to keep safe while operating on Ebola patients

surgical instrumentsAmid the Ebola crisis, two U.S. surgeons with a combined 30 years of working in developing countries have stepped forward to help disseminate well-defined protocols for operating on any patient with the virus or at-risk of having contracting the virus.

In an op-ed piece published today in the San Jose Mercury News, the two surgeons first ask, then answer, their own question: “Why should anyone care about surgery and Ebola? Ebola is a virus.” Their answer is that patients still have accidents. They still need things like appendectomies and C-sections and treatment for gunshot wounds.

The piece points to shocking news reports like those of 16-year-old Shacki Kamara, a patient in Sierra Leone who died of gunshot wounds to his leg during the Ebola quarantine of West Point, Liberia because people were afraid to operate on him. The growing fear of operating on anyone suspected of having contracted the Ebola virus, which is transmitted by bodily fluids, is a flashback to the early days of the AIDS crisis when operating room personnel and physicians often declined to treat patients, said Stanford surgeon Sherry Wren, MD, who co-authored the op-ed with Johns Hopkins surgeon Adam L. Kushner, MD, founder and director of Surgeons OverSeas. The two wrote:

With supportive medical care, patients may survive an Ebola infection. Without surgery for severe trauma, obstructed labor, a strangulated hernia, or a perforated ulcer, some patients may die. The moral dilemma is overwhelming. How does one operate on a patient infected with Ebola, yet at the same time protect the surgical staff?

Last week, the two came together to write an Ebola surgery protocol and send it to a number of surgical organizations, and the largest one – the American College of Surgeons – immediately accepted and posted it on their website. The response to the new guidelines was immediate and overwhelming, Wren said. In Africa, 10 countries have since adopted the protocol. Press articles on the guidelines have also appeared around the world, including in the New York Times and Washington Post and on Al Jazeera. Wren told me in a phone interview that she was both a bit surprised and overwhelmed by the reaction:

I’ll tell you, it was amazing. I’ve seen very few things in surgery go that fast. There was a need to start the discussion. It was never my intent to be the definitive Ebola expert. I’ve never seen a case of Ebola in my life. We expanded existing  CDC guidelines for prevention of transmission of other infections such as HIV and hepatitis and then added common sense from years of  experience operating.

Both Wren and Kushner acknowledged the “unsung heroes” who bravely choose to treat Ebola patients and stress the importance of working to keep them as safe as possible by increasing the availability of supplies of protective gear especially in West Africa and working toward increased training for health care workers. As they state in their op-ed:

 The management of Ebola is new to many clinicians in the United States and elsewhere. We hope to see more training, protocols and personal protective supplies to lower risks to surgical staff and patients. Just as surgery is a necessary part of a functioning health system, surgery must be part of the discussion during this time of Ebola; otherwise, the death toll will not only include those unfortunate to have died from the virus but also those unlucky to have developed a treatable surgical condition in this time of Ebola.

Previously: Experience from the trenches in the first Ebola outbreak, Ebola: A look at what happened and what can be done, Paul Farmer: We should be saving Ebola patients, Ebola panel says 1.3 million cases possible, building trust key to containment and Should we worry? Stanford’s global health chief weighs in on Ebola
Photo by Badly Drawn Dad

Ebola, Events, Global Health, Infectious Disease

Experience from the trenches in the first Ebola outbreak

Experience from the trenches in the first Ebola outbreak

512px-Ebola_virus_emNoted infectious disease expert Donald Francis, MD, PhD, was “a quiet doctoral student” at Harvard when he was called in to fly into the remote bush of southern Sudan in 1976 to help with one of the world’s first documented outbreaks of Ebola. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention dispatched him for a two-week assignment that stretched into two months, as he saw villages demolished by the virus and helped bury some 274 bodies, he told a group of 70 science writers earlier this week in San Francisco.

Like today’s epidemic in West Africa, most people who contracted the disease were caregivers, either at home or at the make-shift tent hospital, or people assisting at funerals, where bodies were literally dripping with blood, he said. A single drop contains many thousands of viral particles, so all it took was a simple scratch of the nose with a contaminated finger to become infected.

Remarkably, none of his team members became infected, though they took risks, including storing viral samples in unsafe vials, and flying in and out of the treatment area when they were supposed to be in quarantine, he said.

Unlike today’s epidemic, the outbreak burned itself out because it took place in the remotest of areas.

“This was a very good place to control an outbreak – very rural, very isolated,” said Francis, co-founder and executive director of Global Solutions for Infectious Diseases.

Francis is the former director of the CDC’s AIDS Laboratory Activities and was among the first to suggest that AIDS was caused by an infectious agent. He has worked in epidemics around the world and helped eradicate smallpox from Sudan, India and Bangladesh before he became involved in the AIDS epidemic.

But his early work was in Ebola. During that first outbreak in Sudan, his five-member team worked with local nurses, some of whom were sickened by the virus but recovered. “I had patients who were so sick that the whole skin of their feet would slough off,” he said. And though the survivors were in a weakened state, losing as much as 20 percent of their body weight, they were determined to continue caring for their fellow villagers, he said.

He said today’s epidemic in West Africa presents a number of “worrisome challenges,” as it is occurring in a part of the world beset by political and social chaos.

“You have social chaos, socio-economic lack of resources, and hospitals that are just set up for transmission of the virus,” he said.

He said Ebola “can be controlled, but once it becomes so broad (as is currently the case), you lose that capability.” He expressed little hope that the current epidemic could be contained anytime soon: “I expect it will play out very badly for at least a year.”

Previously: Ebola: A look at what happened and what can be done,  Dr. Paul Farmer: We should be saving Ebola patients, Ebola panel says 1.4 million cases possible, building trust key to containmentShould we worry? Stanford’s global health chief weighs in on Ebola and Biosecurity experts discuss Ebola and related public health concerns and policy implications
Photo by CDC/ Dr. Frederick A. Murphy

Ebola, Global Health, In the News, Infectious Disease

Ebola: A look at what happened and what can be done

Ebola: A look at what happened and what can be done

As of September 28, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that, so far, more than 7,100 people have been infected with and more than 3,300 have died from the Ebola virus. These estimates of what has happened are almost certainly far too low; the estimates of what will happen are terrifyingly high. The current Ebola epidemic may well become the worst human disaster in this century. And we are not doing enough about it.

Ebola is unlikely to become a major problem in the developed world. But… it seems increasingly likely that hundreds of thousands, and quite possibly millions, of men, women, and children will be struck down by this ghastly plague

What happened?

Researchers will be trying to answer that question for years. This is the 24th known outbreak of Ebola virus disease since it was first recognized in 1976. All of the other outbreaks burned themselves out quickly, after between one and 425 people had been infected. Over nearly 40 years, fewer than 2,500 people are known to have become infected and fewer than 1,500 to have died. The outbreaks were all in Central Africa; they killed people in scattered villages, with few Western connections and fewer Western media on site.

However, the current outbreak started in West Africa, not Central Africa. I suspect this change in location will prove to be the key change, not so much in how it has affected human responses but how it has affected human susceptibility. Yes, the health infrastructures in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone were very poor (and are now far worse), but they were no worse than those in the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan, or Uganda, the sites of most of the earlier outbreaks. But the lands where this outbreak start are more densely populated and better connected. Instead of burning out in one or two villages, hidden away in dense jungle, the virus spread from village to village, from village to town, and eventually from town to city. When it hit Monrovia, the slum-ridden, million-person capital of Liberia, an explosion was probably inevitable. (It has recently begun to expand in Freetown, the capital of Sierra Leone, as well as Conakry, the capital of Guinea.)

The growth of the epidemic has brought with it the growth of terror and the destruction of already tenuous trust, both in governments and in modern health care. It has also brought death from other, treatable conditions that cannot now be treated in health care systems that Ebola has collapsed. It has brought restricted transportation and supplies and, as a result, in some places, sharply higher food prices. It may eventually bring, in spots, starvation.

Recriminations have already started. Why didn’t the West provide powerful help in March 2014, when the epidemic (already about a year old) began to be noticed? Or why hasn’t Western science, expensively pursuing the latest “me too” drug for common Western conditions, produced a treatment, cure, or vaccine for Ebola? These critiques seem too harsh. No previous epidemic has ever ballooned like this one, even in Central Africa. And the chance of an epidemic outside those traditional regions, let alone in the West, appeared remote.

And while some have pointed fingers at the West, others have focused on the behavior of the affected West African populations. Much has been made of their reluctance to abandon traditional methods of burying their dead, their lack of trust in modern medicine, and even their physical attacks on health care workers. But before blaming the victims for their poor infection control measures, put yourself in their shoes. A five year old – perhaps your five year old – is feverish and vomiting. She is crying and holding her arms out to you for comfort, for help. In West Africa you would not have the chance to telephone for an ambulance, with well-protected professionals to treat the child. Touching her could kill you. But what would it do to you – what would it make of you – to ignore her? As Benjamin Hale wrote in Slate, Ebola is a fantastically cruel disease, turning against us our own compassion, care, and love.

Continue Reading »

Ebola, Global Health, Infectious Disease, Patient Care, SMS Unplugged

The hand-sanitizer dilemma: My experiences treating patients in Uganda

The hand-sanitizer dilemma: My experiences treating patients in Uganda

Ugandan hospital - smallSMS (“Stanford Medical School”) Unplugged is a forum for students to chronicle their experiences in medical school. The student-penned entries appear on Scope once a week; the entire blog series can be found in the SMS Unplugged category.

A thick green glob landed on my scrub top at the same time that the first drop of sweat rolled down the small of my back. I tried not to grimace and discretely walked over to the hand-sanitizer dispenser. But like every other hand sanitizer I had tried, this one was empty. Yesterday I had also discovered that the only bathroom in the hospital had no toilet paper. It was 7 AM, and I would be using my pocket toilet-paper stash to clean off sputum from the hacking patient that apparently all the doctors knew to avoid standing in front of. The day was off to a good start.

How, I wondered as we continued rounding, did doctors respond to this dilemma – having to care for patients without being able to fully protect themselves – when they were in health centers treating Ebola. I tried not to think about what I would tell my parents if I developed rare infectious symptoms in a few days. We were in Uganda, countries away from the Ebola outbreak, but there were still plenty of infectious agents we could and probably were exposing ourselves to.

Just as I was wracking my brain for the names of the bacteria and viruses that might be deadly, I noticed one of the doctors rest his hand on a patient’s shoulder. And it dawned on me that the real dilemma was not about what I, who had access to the best medical care, might pick up, but rather about what I might pass from patient to patient.

It’s ironic that in the U.S., patients have to remind doctors to reach out and touch their shoulder or hand at an appropriate time – to make patients feel that the doctor connects with them on a human level. Yet here in Uganda, the  doctors know when to reach out to their patients, they know how to talk to the patient’s family. My clinical-skills professors would love to see this.

But if the hand-sanitizer dispenser was empty for me, it was empty for the  Ugandan doctors as well. We were told as first-year medical students that we would fail our “Practice of Medicine” final if we forgot to sanitize our  hands upon entering our standardized patient’s room. So what were we to do when we had more than twenty patients in one room, each with at least two family members, and no hand sanitizer for anyone? How many of these dozens  of people were walking around with my hacking patient’s sputum on them as  well?

The doctors certainly could be spreading infectious agents. But given the proximity of patients on the wards, those very same infectious agents had likely already been spread between the patients overnight – before we even arrived that morning. I couldn’t help but wonder which was more important to the patients who had a 50 percent chance of survival: to feel that their doctor was treating them as a human being or to increase their chance of survival by a negligible margin? How big or small would the margin introduced by the doctor’s touch have to be to tip the scale one way or another?

Before I could finish thinking through my ethical dilemma, we left the ward to scrub in for surgery. There I found the only working hand-sanitizer dispenser.

Natalia Birgisson is a second-year student at Stanford’s medical school. She is half Icelandic, half Venezuelan and grew up moving internationally before coming to Stanford for college. She is interested in neurosurgery, global health, and ethics. Natalia loves running and baking; when she’s lucky the two activities even out.

Photo of Ugandan hospital by Natalia Birgisson

CDC, Ebola, Events, Global Health, Stanford News, Videos

Video of Stanford Ebola panel now available

Video of Stanford Ebola panel now available

Last week, a group of Stanford and CDC experts came together to address the health, governance, security and ethical dimensions of Ebola, the virus that is spreading rapidly in West Africa. Video of the lengthy and timely talk, courtesy of the Freeman Spogli Institute, is now available.

Previously: Ebola panel says 1.4 million cases possible, building trust key to containmentInterdisciplinary campus panel to examine Ebola outbreak from all angles, Expert panel discusses challenges of controlling Ebola in West Africa, Should we worry? Stanford’s global health chief weighs in on Ebola and Biosecurity experts discuss Ebola and related public health concerns and policy implications

Cancer, Global Health, Health Policy, Infectious Disease, Public Health

Treating an infection to prevent a cancer: H. pylori and stomach cancer

Treating an infection to prevent a cancer: H. pylori and stomach cancer

Hpylori-pic-thumb-460x385-2092

The number of newly diagnosed stomach cancer cases in the United States is less than a tenth of the number of prostate cancer cases or breast cancer cases, which may be part of the reason it doesn’t get the same attention as breast and prostate cancer. But the mortality rate is much higher for stomach (or gastric) cancer. Nearly 11,000 Americans will likely die from gastric cancer this year, with only 28 percent of cases surviving five years or more. For comparison, the five-year survival rate for prostate cancer is nearly 99 percent and for breast cancer, it’s more than 89 percent.

On a global scale, an estimated 700,000 people will die from gastric cancer this year, as Stanford infectious disease specialist Julie Parsonnet, MD, and her co-authors note in a Viewpoint piece in the most recent issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. The authors also point out that worldwide, about 77 percent of gastric cancer cases are linked to chronic infections of Helicobacter pylori, a helix-shaped bacteria that was identified in the early 1980s and found to be linked to gastric ulcers a few years later, as well as to gastritis, an inflammation of the stomach lining that is a precursor to stomach cancer.

Researchers are still trying to understand exactly how H. pylori causes cancer or even how it colonizes the gastrointestinal track – they believe it’s picked up via food or water. Until recently, there was a dearth of randomized clinical trials that looked at the effectiveness of screening and treatment for H. pylori as a method for preventing stomach cancer.

Ignoring gastric cancer in the hope that it will soon disappear is not a tenable health policy

In the opinion piece, the authors describe the recommendations of a working group that met in December 2013 at the behest of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Taking the burden of the disease and the availability of treatment options in consideration, the group considered gastric cancer “a logical target for intervention,” according to the authors of the JAMA piece. They go on to write:

Screening and treatment for H pylori is generally acceptable and affordable. An inexpensive serological test can determine who may be infected, with a sensitivity and specificity that could be sufficient for population-based prevention programs. Low-cost treatment regimens using 2 or 3 generic antibiotics plus a proton pump inhibitor for 7 to 14 days can eradicate the infection in more than 80% of cases, depending on the antibiotic resistance patterns of H pylori within the population. Economic modeling studies indicate that H pylori screening and treatment strategies are cost-effective under a large range of assumptions about effectiveness and costs. However, the models are limited by reliance on observational data rather than randomized trial results, by a lack of information on possible adverse effects of treatment, and by limited data from lower-income countries.

Researchers still have many gaps in their understanding of the best methods to prevent stomach cancer, but several trials may answer some of those questions in the coming decade.

Stomach cancer is not the only cancer known to be linked with an infection. Doctors routinely test whether women who come in for a PAP smear are infected with the human papilloma virus (HPV), which is linked to cervical cancer. Chronic hepatitis B and C infections are known to be linked to liver cancer. In time, screening for H. pylori to prevent stomach cancer may become routine. Until then, Parsonnet and her coauthors say in their conclusion, “Ignoring gastric cancer in the hope that it will soon disappear is not a tenable health policy.”

Previously: Researchers identify potential drug target in ulcer bug that infects half the world’s population, Good-bye cancer, good-bye stomach: A survivor shares her tale and Image of the Week: Helicobacter pylori colonizing the stomach
Photo by Shuman Tan and Lydia-Marie Joubert

CDC, Ebola, Events, Global Health, In the News, Infectious Disease

Ebola panel says 1.4 million cases possible, building trust key to containment

Ebola panel says 1.4 million cases possible, building trust key to containment

ebola workers2The Ebola epidemic is spreading rapidly – leaving a wake of suffering – in large part because West Africa has shockingly few medical facilities or trained personnel. But it’s exploding exponentially because of mistrust, a panel of experts told a packed crowd on the Stanford campus last evening.

The numbers, as described by Ruthann Richter in a just-published story, are sobering:

Officially, more than 5,800 Ebola cases and 2,800 deaths from the disease have been reported in four countries: Liberia, Guinea, Sierra Leone and Nigeria. But panelists said those figures were vastly underestimated. At the current rate of spread, in which the number of new infections is doubling every three weeks, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 1.4 million people could be infected by the end of January 2015 in the absence of dramatic interventions, said Douglas Owens, MD, a professor of medicine and director of the Center for Health Policy at Freeman Spogli Institute of International Studies.

But even with “very aggressive” intervention, Owens said, it’s estimated there would be at least 25,000 cases by late December. If intervention is delayed by just one month, there will be 3,000 new cases every day; if it’s delayed by two months, there will be 10,000 new cases daily, he said. “It gives you a sense of the extraordinary urgency in terms of time,” Owens told the audience.

During the talk Stanford health-policy expert Paul Wise, MD, screened a CNN video that depicts a man escaping from a treatment facility in Liberia. “You have to create treatment centers that are of the highest quality and that treat people with dignity — so people will want to go there, rather than escape,” he said.

Building trust starts local, Tara Perti, MD, told the audience. She works as a CDC epidemic intelligence service officer and spent time in both Guinea and Sierra Leone this summer:

In Guinea, she traveled to a village north of the capital city of Conakry, where she met two young men who had recovered from the disease, which has a fatality rate as high as 70 percent. One of the men had lost five members of his family, but he had become a community advocate. He traveled with Perti to a neighboring village, where they met a woman who was sick and whose son had died of the disease. “She was very fearful of going to the treatment center… but she was ultimately convinced to seek treatment. She recovered and was able to return home,” Perti said.

“The patient who survived was tremendously helpful because he could speak from experience and be credible. There needs to be more of these. In the forested region of Guinea, there are a lot of superstitions and different beliefs besides germ theory, and so it’s very challenging to go into those areas and help people understand that Ebola is a virus, it’s real and we do have ways to help patients.”

The world’s disjointed response to the epidemic points points to the need for global-health reforms, Michele Barry, MD, director of Stanford’s Center for Innovation in Global Health, concluded.

Becky Bach is a former park ranger and newspaper reporter who now writes about science as an intern at the Office of Communications and Public Affairs. 

Previously: Interdisciplinary campus panel to examine Ebola outbreak from all angles, Expert panel discusses challenges of controlling Ebola in West Africa, Should we worry? Stanford’s global health chief weighs in on Ebola and Biosecurity experts discuss Ebola and related public health concerns and policy implications
Photo, of health workers at an Ebola treatment unit in Liberia, by USAID/Morgana Wingard

Ebola, Events, Global Health, Health Policy, In the News, Infectious Disease, Public Health

Interdisciplinary campus panel to examine Ebola outbreak from all angles

Interdisciplinary campus panel to examine Ebola outbreak from all angles

Ebola_091914

Scientists have estimated that the West Africa Ebola epidemic will take another 12-18 months to control and will infect hundreds of thousands of more people during that time. In an opinion piece published last week in the Los Angeles Times, Michele Barry, MD, director of Stanford’s Center for Innovation in Global Health, discussed how the outbreak got so out of control and explains why the “world needs a new approach to solving massive international health crises and preventing future ones.”

Tomorrow on the Stanford campus, Barry will participate in an interdisciplinary forum focusing on the health, governance, security and ethical dimensions of the epidemic. Additional speakers include Doug Owens, MD, a general internist and director of the Center for Health Policy/Primary Care Outcomes Research; microbiologist David Relman, MD, a fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation; Stephen Stedman, deputy director at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law; and Paul Wise, MD, MPH, a child health specialist and core faculty member of the Center for Health Policy/Primary Care Outcomes Research. Drawing on their diverse backgrounds, the panelists will offer unique perspectives from their respective fields on the latest developments in addressing the outbreak.

The event will be held at 4 PM local time at the Bechtel Conference Center in Encina Hall and is free and open to the public. Conference organizers will also be live tweeting the panel; you can follow the coverage on the @FSIStanford Twitter feed, or by using the hashtag #EbolaForum.

Previously: Expert panel discusses challenges of controlling Ebola in West AfricaShould we worry? Stanford’s global health chief weighs in on Ebola, Biosecurity experts discuss Ebola and related public health concerns and policy implications and Stanford global health chief launches campaign to help contain Ebola outbreak in Liberia
Photo by European Commission DG ECHO

Ebola, Global Health, In the News, Infectious Disease, Public Health

Expert panel discusses challenges of controlling Ebola in West Africa

The rapidly growing Ebola outbreak in West Africa is not only overwhelming the health systems of the countries involved, but the World Bank recently warned that it could trash the economies of Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone – the countries that have seen the most cases. Since the first confirmed case in December 2013 in Guinea, almost 5,000 people have become infected with the virus in five countries and about half of them have died. On September 16, President Obama committed 3,000 military personnel to help fight the outbreak, along with other resources.

This morning, KQED’s Forum hosted a panel of Ebola experts, including Michele Barry, MD, director of Stanford’s Center for Innovation in Global Health. The panel discussed some of the challenges this outbreak poses. One issue is the enormous need for resources to control an outbreak of this momentum and magnitude. The WHO estimates it will take about a billion dollars to contain and by some estimates, it will require 1,000 international health care workers to train national, local clinicians.

Barry discussed the prospects for Zmapp, an experimental drug to treat Ebola -“a cocktail of monoclonal antibodies” according to Barry – for helping to curb the disease. She said that besides the lack of human clinical data on the effectiveness of this drug, the difficulty producing the drug also slows down plans to use the medication in the field. She went on to say:

I do have optimism for containing the virus. What I don’t have optimism for is the long-term trajectory of the Liberian healthcare workforce. It’s been actually decimated. I think there are wonderful people there working on it on the ground, but actually, there’s only a only a couple hundred doctors and a serious percentage of them have died—as well as nurses, in this battle against Ebola.

She elaborated on her concerns for the long-term problems for controlling epidemics in general:

I think there are short-term problems, but then I would urge people to start – and I know many people are – to think about long term issues. The long term issues of when you have a WHO that’s had its budget decimated, and its pandemic and epidemic division disbanded. That needs to be strengthened. When you have a workforce in Africa of only – I mean they have 25 percent of the disease burden but only four percent of the workforce. That needs to be strengthened. So there are long term issues of control for future epidemics.

She also suggested that a global health worker reserve corps could be assembled, a fund to strengthen health systems could be established, much like The Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and the UN could take a more active role in large infectious disease epidemics.

Continue Reading »

Applied Biotechnology, Bioengineering, Global Health, In the News, Stanford News

Stanford bioengineer among Popular Science magazine’s “Brilliant 10”

Stanford bioengineer among Popular Science magazine’s “Brilliant 10”

prakash-popsci

Manu Prakash, PhD, a prolific inventor of low-cost scientific tools, has been named one of Popular Science magazine’s “Brilliant 10” for 2014 – an award that recognizes the nation’s brightest young minds in science and engineering.

In the last year Prakash has introduced two novel science tools made from everyday materials.

The first was a fully functional paper microscope, which costs less than a dollar in materials, that can be used for diagnosing blood-borne diseases such as malaria, African sleeping sickness and Chagas. It can also be used by children — our future scientists — to explore and learn from the microscopic world.

The second was a $5 programmable kid’s chemistry set, inspired by hand-crank music boxes. Like a music box, users crank a wheel that feeds a strip of hole-punched paper through the mechanism. When a pin hits a hole, it activates a pump that releases a precise, time-sequenced drop of a liquid onto a surface. This low-cost device can be used to test water quality, to provide affordable medical diagnostic tests, or to design chemistry experiments in schools.

The inventions are brilliant in both their elegant simplicity and their use of emerging technologies, such as 3D printers, microfluidics, laser cutters and conductive-ink printing.

“In one part of our lab we’ve been focusing on frugal science and democratizing scientific tools to get them out to people around the world who will use them,” Prakash told Amy Adams in a recent Stanford News story. “I’d started thinking about this connection between science education and global health. The things that you make for kids to explore science are also exactly the kind of things that you need in the field because they need to be robust and they need to be highly versatile.”

Sometimes, just for the fun of it, I’ll wander over to the Prakash lab to check out the team’s new inventions. They never fail to impress.

I heartily agree with the Popular Science editors on this year’s choices for the Brilliant 10: “Remember their names: they are already changing the world as we know it.”

Previously: Manu Prakash on how growing up in India influenced his interests as a Maker and entrepreneur, Dr. Prakash goes to Washington, The pied piper of cool science tools, Music box inspires a chemistry set for kids and scientists in developing countries and Free DIY microscope kits to citizen scientists with inspiring project ideas
Illustration courtesy of Popular Science magazine

Stanford Medicine Resources: